CCCCC AA RRRRR OOOO LL II NN N AA
CC AA A RR R OO O LL II NNN N AA A
CC AA A RRRRR OO O LL II NN N N AA A
CC AAAAAA RR R OO O LL II NN NN AAAAAA
CCCCC AA A RR R OOOO LLLLLL II NN N AA A
STUDENTS' E-MAIL NEWS FROM CZECH REPUBLIC
School of Social Sciences of Charles University
Smetanovo nabr. 6
110 01 Prague 1
Czech Republic
e-mail address: carolina@n.fsv.cuni.cs
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
C A R O L I N A No 57.1, Friday, January 8, 1993.
At the end of the last year, before the division of the republic,
we received a series of letters from our readers who are scattered all
over the globe. In their letters, they told us about their opinions
about the splitting of Czechoslovakia into two independent states. In
this special issue of Carolina, we will publish these letters, without
editing, comments or screening, and in the order in which they arrived.
We received some letters in English - and we had to translate them. We
would like to ask our readers not only to forgive us for the flaws in
the translation into Czech, but also that did not edit them. As a matter
of principle, we will publish Slovak contributions in Slovak (in the
Czech version of Carolina), and they will be especially welcome, as they
come from abroad, yet close to us.
We would like to exploit the possibilities of e-mail and make
closer contacts with our readers. If we accumulate more contributions on
an interesting topic, we will be glad to publish them.
It was a letter by Mr. Slobodnik that inspired us to undertake this
action; he was the first to express his opinion about the split of
Czechoslovakia.
Editors
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date Thu, 10 Dec 92 17:38:08 +0100
From: slobod@emic.ucl.ac.be
Subject: Nazor (Opinion)
My first impression of the reaction of many Czechs discussing the
break-up of the republic is as follows - how easy is to separate people,
even friends and acquaintances, in the name of political interests and
visions. In the western economical philosophy the dominant aspect is the
profit - in every situation and without regards to any ethical
principles. I have had ample opportunity to frequently observe it here
in Belgium. We are rather naive to think that anybody will help us, or
even more, that anybody will mend our economy. I do not believe it, for
it goes against the way of thinking of the business establishment (and
other establishments as well). We can only count on the help that
ensures peace and profit for the West - in simple terms, they will help
us enough to prevent a mass migration to the West and to ensure our
continuous (and as long-term as possible) functioning as a source of
cheap but highly-qualified labour. I think it is contrary to their
interests to have a strong Czechoslovakia. I assume that many thoughtful
people in the West realize that the "labourer" in the East (i.e. central
Europe) is in many regards more "qualified" than his counterpart in the
West, hence, using the western technology and managerial methods
Czechoslovakia could fast become a formidable competition. This is the
naked truth which we have to accept. We have to make it on our own.
Under these circumstances the Czechs and Slovaks (their respective
political representations) fail to trust each other - as brothers who do
not know how to use their common inheritance as each of them think that
he can manage it better, and, what is even worse, that the other got
more in the past, or worse yet, that the other could be a burden to
carry. In the life of a family there are moments of mutual distrust and
blame. But never ever is anything only either black or white. In the
case of the younger brother (Slovakia) the whole problem is compounded
by a feeling (granted not always based on reality - for only civil
servants and maybe politicians know the whole truth) that the older
brother (Czechs) is too selfish and forgets that the younger brother
does not want to live on the dole, but would like to, with the help of
the older brother, develop to an equal partner. This all is, by my
judgment, the reasons for the break-up of Czechoslovakia. All you can
find in newspapers, regrettably more often in Czech than in Slovak
press, is only a (and often very primitive) political manipulation and
massage of brains. Every action causes a reaction and this rule of
physics is often utilized not only by press but also by the top of the
political establishment. I always ask myself who will benefit from the
break-up of the republic. An ordinary Slovak will not, for sure, and an
ordinary Czech as well not, I think. My conclusion from all of this is
that both brothers have contributed equally to the break-up. It is,
probably, the only way to find out that a cohabitation based on
partnership, mutual respect and understanding is advantageous for both.
It is witnessed by work relationships between Czechs and Slovaks in any
area. That's where a partnership and mutual respect and understanding
can be found. The moment politics enters the picture - considering other
than professional interests - it hits the end. The way the future will
develop depends not only on politicians and their lackeys, but also on
thinking people.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 19:04:34 MDT
From: Ivan Kordac
Subject: deleni ceskoslovenska (Breaking up Czechoslovakia)
As far as the break-up (of the republic) I feel as a cosmopolitan;
I would not mind what language I use, if I knew it. Good people can be
found everywhere. The break-up of the republic illustrates what
principle states should not be based on ... the national principle ...
see UN charter on self-determination of nations ... it was a mistake to
start with to make such a proclamation. I wonder what arguments will be
used to silence the Moravian "illuminators" to prevent repeat of the
Slovakia situation. I sincerely believe that it will dawn on them that
we all have to pull in the same direction. I think that the process of
breaking up of CSR is connected to the process of emancipation of
colonies after the first and second world wars, unfortunately delayed
and slowed by the totalitarian regime. This state had no chance to
survive on some supernational principle when surrounded by a fragmenting
world. Ivan
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 12:39 N
From:
Subject: Before long, Czechoslovakia will cease to exist... (Carolina
54, 17/12/1992)
Dear Carolina,
Nobody can have two mutually exclusive things. A part of
Czechoslovak citizens - not necessarily a majority - desires Slovak
independence and sovereignty which, as it turned out, is in
contradiction with the traits of a common state: a single subject before
international law, the army, and money-printing authority. This part of
the citizens managed to neutralize the Federal Parliament, and thus de
facto dissolved the common state. Their program is to build a common
state from below, after realizing the complete and consequential
independence and sovereignty of Slovak Republic.
Why should not we, after all, respect their wish, we who do not
like to lose a common homeland?
Because not to respect their will means to prolong the agony, to
lead both nations into chaos and anarchy at a critical time when it is
important for both nations to renew a prosperous market economy and to
reinforce the free and democratic form of the state.
It is about time that each of the nations saw for itself to what
extent it can exist and prosper in an independent, sovereign state.
The developments in Czechoslovakia up to now - an uneasy obstacle
course - showed that the citizens did not manage to create a functioning
common state. What remains is the only alternative, the dissolution of
the state and attempts at good neighbourly relations in the future.
Correct and decent!
With the best wishes to both nations on their path to freedom and
independence,
Miroslav Havranek
Stuttgart University
FRG
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 09:28:58 EST
From: Charles Ingrao
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
In response to your invitation to comment on the imminent
dissolution of Czechoslovakia, let me say that the real tragedy is not
in the final separation of the country's two enfranchised nationalities,
but in its creation at the end of World War I. At its inception it
comprised not two but six national groups, five of whom were less than
enthusiastic about being joined to a state that would be dominated by
a single nationality. The forced expulsion of three million Germans and
the secession/annexation of its Ukrainian population did not lessen the
dissatisfaction of those Hungarians who remain a less-than-equal
minority in a two-nation state called "Czechoslovakia". Nor did it
sufficiently enhance the self-esteem of the Slovaks.
All of the nations would have benefitted much more had the Masaryk,
the Czech people, and the allies had decided in 1918 to put their faith
in a thoroughly democratic federal state comprising not just
Czechoslovakia's ethnic groups but the Austrian Germans, Hungarians,
Slovenes and Croats of defeated Austria-Hungary (perhaps without the
Habsburgs). A truly democratic multi-national federal state of that
significance would have fared much better economically and - most
important - would have been able to resist the aggressive designs of
Hitler and Stalin. There would have been no Anschluss, no Munich Crisis,
and probably no Iron Curtain had such a powerful state survived the
Great War.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 08:15:30 CST
From: Ken Janda
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
You asked for reactions to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. I am
a second-generation Czech whose grandparents all came from Bohemia and
who still visits relatives in Pilsen and Prague. I married
a first-generation Slovak, Anna Mozolakova, whose parents came from
a small town near Myjava, which we have also visited. I am a professor
of Political Science at Northwestern University in a suburb of Chicago;
my wife is a specialist in computer datasets in our university library.
She speaks Slovak fluently; I regret that I can only listen to Czech
with a child's comprehension. We are both terribly sad about the
dissolution and cannot understand how this could happen without the
citizens' insistence on a referendum. I happen to be the senior author
of THE CHALLENGE OF DEMOCRACY: GOVERNMENT IN AMERICA, 2,500 copies of
which have been donated to the Czechoslovak Universities Development
Fund in Prague. In my opinion, there can be no justification for this
action under democratic theory in the absence of a popular vote. I do
not know a single American of Czechoslovakian descent who approves of
the separation. My Slovak brother-in-law is equally incredulous of the
development. Although we are all Americans by birth and law, our souls
are still Czechoslovakian, and we mourn the end of the federation.
With regrets,
Kenneth Janda
Department of Political Science
Northwestern University
Evanston, IL 60208
K-Janda@NWU.EDU Fax: 708-491-8985
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 09:24 CST
From: George L. Marchin
Subject: request for opinions about czech-slovak break
Hello
My parents were born in the US but all four of my grandparents were
from Slovakia-near the Kosice Bardejov area. It's not a strong feeling
but I had the impression growing up that the Slovaks always felt as if
they were second class citizens in the CS union. My dad said a few times
that they felt under the hand of the Czechs. I've personally traveled
a bit in Czechoslovakia and my impression is that the Slovaks were kind
of considered the "red necks" of the country. My fear is that
economically the Slovaks may have a difficult time being independent but
that they would rather be free for nationalistic and cultural reasons
even if it means being a little poorer in a material sense.
Sincerely, George L. Marchin GMARCHIN@KSUVM.KSU.EDU
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:40:59 CST
From: Roger Sharpe
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
I am responding to your request for views about the upcoming split
of Czechoslovakia. In my view this is a sad mistake. Your country is
about one-half the area of my state, Nebraska, and has some 16 million
people. My state has about 1.6 million people. Your country is very
small and thus is strongly influenced by your neighbors. From the Czech
side, I am concerned about the very strong economic and potentially
political influences from Austria and Germany. Very clearly the Czechs
will benefit from the economic influences and already have benefited.
However I am also concerned about the political and cultural influences
that could ultimately result in Cechy being a Germanic satellite,
a condition that has existed in the past for centuries.If Europe becomes
a political and economic unity, this will be a small problem, but if
not, the Czechs must guard against being "swallowed up."
The Slovaks, on the other hand, will likely experience less
influence from countries such as Austria and Germany, and I fear will
not develop economically as rapidly and successfully as the Czechs.
Slovakia is primarily an agricultural state; its culture is "closer to
the land" and the people have never had the cultural development and
economic experience that the Czechs have had. By splitting the country,
the Slovaks will not learn as easily from the Czechs as they would if
the country were together. Finally, by being somewhat less developed
culturally and economically, the Slovaks will not experience nearly as
much foreign investment as have and will the Czechs.
What I am predicting is that the result of the split of the country
will be that the Czechs will be big winners, because they will not have
to provide assistance to the Slovaks, and the Slovaks will be big losers
without strong connections with the Czechs.
I do understand the position of many Slovaks. They do feel inferior
to the Czechs. Czechs have dominated the economics and politics and will
continue to do so. But in very important matters such as these, the head
should rule the heart. Emotions should play a small role in these
decisions, because the real losers and winners will be the children and
grandchildren, and not the current generation.
We have a similar situation here in my state. My city, Omaha, is
about 750,000 people and represents the cultural and economic center of
the state. It also exerts strong political pressure on the entire state.
The remainder of the state is agricultural and except for the city of
Lincoln (150,000) the towns are very small. The farming communities
resent Omaha and are very jealous of the economic and cultural influence
of my city. Some from the distant rural communities periodically suggest
forming their own state or joining the state of Wyoming. However, no one
takes this seriously, because the advantages of remaining in Nebraska
far outweigh the advantages of joining Wyoming. Nebraska has more money
than Wyoming and the distribution of tax money from Omaha to the rest of
the state, for roads, hospitals, schools, police and fire protection,
etc. is greater than what would be gained from Wyoming.
Yes, we here in Omaha sometimes resent the fact that some of our tax
monies are spent in rural areas. But we have learned to be tolerant;
that there must be a social system that in some way redistributes the
wealth that is concentrated in Omaha. Without such a system, the rich
get richer and the poor get poorer. Democracy cannot exist without
a significant level of social responsibility. The end result of
significant economic inequities is disorder, measured by political
instability, civil war and sometimes war between states.
The split in Czechoslovakia will indeed be costly, particularly for
the Slovaks. They used their hearts in making an important decision
about their future; after months of hearing from the Slovaks about Czech
discrimination, the Czechs finally became angry and also used their
hearts in the final decision. It is understandable in the human context,
but sometimes we are called upon to rise above our humanity.
Hapy Christmas. Roger Sharpe (name of my mother was Serpanova)
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: 18 Dec 1992 11:01:51 -0700 (MST)
From: KOPSTEIN JEFFREY S
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
It is truly one of the great paradoxes of our age that, precisely
when Western Europe and North American stand at the point of great
projects of unification, Czechoslovakia stands at the point of
disintegration. While both processes are most likely driven by forces
that we only dimly understand, one cannot help but feel that the breakup
of Czechoslovakia reprents more than this. It also reflects sa
disappointing failure in civic nerve from a country that many in the
West had come to admire for its characther and humanity. If indeed this
is the country's swan-song, then we can only hope that its last
contribution to civilization will be a model of how to part gracefully
and peacefully.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: 18 Dec 1992 07:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: BERKOVEJ@CGSVAX.CLAREMONT.EDU
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
The division of Czechoslovakia is sad. It is too bad that people so
closely related in recent history cannot agree to live together but must
separate. At least the separation is occurring in a peacable manner as
contrasted to events occurring in many other parts of the world.
James Berkovec
Claremont, California, USA
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 11:26 EST
From: MFRZ@buckwheat.pas.rochester.edu
Subject: contribution to a special issue (Slovak)
The end of the Czechoslovak state troubles me deeply, and I am
convinced that it will impoverish both the Slovak and the Czech nation.
It seems to me that the saddest part of the whole matter is that it is
happening agaist the will of the majority of the people, and that the
real cause of it are actually just irresponsible and demagogical acts of
the political elite in Slovakia and Bohemia. I consider these acts to be
a cynical contempt for basic principles of political culture and
democracy as a whole.
That on January 1, I am de facto losing my homeland which I love,
is a fact which I percieve as a shameless crime committed against the
people of Czechoslovakia. It is a crime whose monstrosity can be only
compared to that of the Munich Pact. Then, more than half a century ago,
we were betrayed by foreign powers - now we are betrayed by our own
politicians. It is a realization which hurts and humiliates.
Perhaps it is not too late to express one's dissent with the state
of affairs. Just remember: when it started three years ago, Jakes
didn't even last a week...
Marcel Franz
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 14:05:42 GMT
From: BUTKOVIP@IBM3090.COMPUTER-CENTRE.BIRMINGHAM.AC.UK
Subject: Statement concerning the end of CSFR
Dear Carolina, during the election in June 1992, there was a single
political party with the program to disintegrate the common state (SNS),
and it got 8% of the votes. Need we add anything about the will of the
Slovaks to live together with the Czechs?
P. Butkovic
presently Birmingham University (UK)
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: 21 Dec 1992 09:28:50 -0600 (CST)
From: KOVARP@randb.abbott.com
Subject: Comment on the dissolution of Czechoslovakia
My father submits the following...
Czechoslovakia,
The whole world sees it.
Where did you put your head?
You have succumbed
To the vain words
Of unwise people.
Not to the crowd!
You have forgotten
Father's advice
To his sons.
Unkind destiny is awaiting you,
Perhaps a cruel one.
It could have been entirely different,
Just think - of the three twigs.
IJK
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: 21 Dec 1992 15:31:27 -0400
From: JANSA@AC.DAL.CA
Subject: comment on Carolina Dec. 21 News
Dear Colleagues,
responding to your request for an opinion about the disintegration
of CSR, as a Czech living abroad, I am not only deeply troubled by the
whole affair, but also very outraged. From your reports it follows
clearly that the majority of the population in Bohemia and Slovakia is
against the division. How is it possible in a democratic state that the
opinion of the population means nothing, and that politicians on both
sides who see an opportunity to strengthen their power make laws as they
see fit, not to mention that they not only ruin the former republic, but
that both states, Bohemia and Slovakia, will sooner or later pay dearly
for this split. Last week, Mexico, USA and Canada signed treaties on
economic unity, and CSR, instead of building its political and
economical position in Europe, and instead of trying to be integrated
into a united Europe, falls apart into two tiny states, and instead of
economic progress, it is preoccupied with haggling about what belongs to
whom, who gets what and so on. The structure of CSR should have been
decided upon by a plebiscite, or new elections in which the division of
CSR would be the primary issue. You are building a political/partisan
dictatorship, not a democratic system!
Dr. Luba Jansa
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 10:05:26 PST
From: "Beverly Swanson"
Subject: Re: Carolina/Eng No 54
REPLY TO 12/18/92 05:29 FROM CAR-ENG@CSEARN.BITNET "CAROLINA - E-mail
news
weekly": Carolina/Eng No 54
Dear Carolina and friends in the Chech and Slovak Republics: It is
sad that this beautiful experiment is ending. I hope that this New Year
and all the years to come bring peace, prosperity and blessings to both
republics since there are so many family connections. I hope this
separation serves as an example to the rest of the world. My prayers are
with my friends, their countries and their governments.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 09:03 SAST
From: PN1@sunvax.sun.ac.za
Subject: Rozdeleni CSFR (Breaking up CSFR)
Dear editors
I am accepting your challenge to share my feelings about the break-
up of Czechoslovakia. Similarly as the majority of Czechs I look upon
the events with a bit of nostalgia and feel pity for those directly and
unpleasantly affected by the break-up since a part of their family lives
in Bohemia or Moravia and a part in Slovakia. At the same time I feel
a certain relief, for I do not belong to that above mentioned group.
When the communist hold on power was partially broken at the end of
1989 most people in Czechoslovakia expected that most of the effort will
be directed towards economic renewal, building of democratic structures,
and preservation of environment; simply put, towards all things that
make the so-called civilized word really civilized. As for me I was
surprised that, in part, bickering and quarrelling around the national
question arose instead. On the other hand we cannot overlook the
systematic emancipation drive of Slovakia - in 1938-39, 1968. The
question is whether these efforts were motivated by economical hardship,
the efforts of politicians to grab a bigger share of power, the ethnic
hatred, or the unfair relationship between the two republics.
By my opinion the first two reasons are applicable to the situation
now. The economic reforms to invigorate the socialist economy brought on
hardship that has been exploited to create mood hostile to the reform
and to even bigger degree to the reformers. In connection to this we
cannot overlook the great influence the mass media enjoy. I am of the
opinion that the points of view of mass media in CR and SR have diverged
significantly and that has brought on different perceptions of the
social changes in the republics.
Now, when the state has been broken up, we can ask who was the
culprit or were it possible to prevent it. My opinion is that it was
possible, if only the Slovak federalist politicians mastered to stand up
to the nationalist and anti-reform groups in Slovakia and if the Czech
side did not let itself be manoeuvred to the position of continuously
making concessions. It is a paradox that these days politicians like F.
Miklosko or Carnogursky brothers vote against the break-up of the state
while it was them who had the chance to complete the negotiations about
the constitution of CSFR and so make it harder for the future
governments to dissolve the republic. Instead, they tried to catch up
with the nationalist wave which sunk them in the following elections.
Another paradox is that the movement that completed the break-up of
the state won the elections on the promise to change the course of
reforms and not, at least not explicitly, to make Slovakia wholly
independent. This is borne by the public opinion polls by which most of
Slovak citizens do not want the separation.
I must commend, though, the process of dissolution. It was possible
to secure a constitutional bill of the dissolution and to adopt new
constitutions instead, so from the outside all was going smoothly. The
international news agencies as BBC, CNN, Newsweek, and The Time are
paying very little attention to Czechoslovakia, and this is only good as
in the contemporary world affairs no news is good news. As for the
independent Czech Republic it is imperative to focus on significant
problems, to strengthen political, business and tourist contacts with
civilized world, and to stress inconspicuously that it is not a part of
Yugoslavia, which not too many people in the world know. It is
a question whether we can successfully maintain close and warm
relationship with the Slovak republic. It is realistic to expect
economic problems, and they will not help strengthen the relationship,
and mutual blaming and accusing can be exploited in the future by some
politicians as well.
Regards, Petr Navratil, Stellenbosch, RSA.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
From: jensen@unlinfo.unl.edu (michael jensen)
Subject: Editorial from Nebraska, USA, re CR/SR
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 9:28:00 CST
------------------
Editorial
(All editorials are the "opinions of the Lincoln Journal-Star")
January 3, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
------------------
Death of Czechoslovakia occasion for lamenting
Because of Nebraska's European settlement pattern, with a solid
representation of Behemian families, the formal breakup of
Czechoslovakia on New Year's Eve imparted unusual poignancy.
Why did this have to happen? At a distance, it appears silly and,
even worse, counterproductive. Especially for the Slovaks.
For all the overt friendliness and careful cooperation involved in
dismembering of the 74-year-old nation, the act signifies the failure of
a post-World War I experiment in idealism.
Free Czechoslovakia had been cited as an international model, of
how moderately diverse groups could be civil, united and democratic. To
the oputside world, the union seemed to work. But the glue joining the
more populous and urbanized Czechs with the minority and more rural
Slovaks dissolved under the strain of resentments perpetually nursed in
Bratislava, now the capital of the independent Slovak Republic.
In a real sense, the cultural patterns imposed and maintained by
the long-dead Austro-Hungarian monarchy reanimated themselves once the
cruel control of post-World War II Russian imperialism ended. The Czechs
and Prague instinctively look west, the Slovaks and Bratislava look
east.
In those orientations, especially in the differences in economic
systems, Slovaks are apt to experience greater discomforts fitting into
a 21st century global network.
But that is the choice Slovakians made at the ballot box. The lure
of and romance with a distinctive national autonomy was knowingly
embraced.
On both sides of the new border--actually it's an ancient line
dividing Austro-Hungarian administrative zones--good will continues to
exist. That can be sustained, with mutual civility.
At some future point, a move back toward some sort of renewed
federated status may take on greater appeal. Such an option should not
be permanently ruled out, and particularly in a Europe where other
nation states are tending toward a borderless landscape.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
From: kgarver@cwis.unomaha.edu (Bruce Garver)
Subject: Comments on the division of Czechoslovakia
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 18:28:00 MDT
Our American family of five was pleased to spend a short working
vacation in Prague and Kutna Hora during the past eleven days. An
anticipated bonus was being able to follow opinions in the Czech press
on the recent division of Czechoslovakia and to discuss with friends and
colleagues the apparent causes and probable consequences of this
division.
This division was in many respects a sad occasion, especially for
Americans like us who remember with gratitude those Czechs and Slovaks
who fought with us in two World Wars to save Europe from domination
after 1914 by an authoritarian Imperial Germany and after 1941 by Nazi
Germany. Ever since the democratic elections of June 1992 gave
the HZDS political leadership in the Slovak Republic, most people
in the whole country and many elsewhere have been resigned to the
breakup of what was for twenty years an admirable, but in the end
unsuccessful, effort to establish democratic representative
government in Central Europe.
I read with interest and often with agreement the comments of
several colleagues in Carolina on the problems and sometimes
unattractive prospects of the now fully independent Czech and Slovak
states. With a view to furthering discussion, I would, as a Czech,
German, and English-speaking historian, like to take a slightly more
optimistic view of the past and future of the Czech and Slovak peoples.
First, I think we should remember that in light of nearly fifty years of
tyranny (6 years of the Protectorate and the Tiso Republic, and nearly
42 years of Communist rule), the future seems very hopeful for a change.
Rather than compare present serious problems to some idealized picture
of the past of Austria-Hungary and the First Czechoslovak Republic, we
should contrast the still somewhat hopeful future, especially in the
Czech Republic, to the recent twenty years of misery and devastation
wrought by the Communist normalizers, Czechs and Slovaks alike. On the
positive side, we can credit the authoritarian constitutional
Austro-Hungarian Monarchy with having facilitated the longest periods of
sustained economic growth in the Czech lands, aside from the 1920s, and
for having facilitated the development by Czechs of political parties,
fraternal organizations (e.g. Sokol), and a mass circulation press, all
subject of course to the limits imposed by Austrian censorship and the
occasional imposition of Imperial rule by decree or by martial law. On
the negative side, we should not forget the savage and thorough-going
oppression of the Slovaks by the Hungarians in the name of
"Magyarization," a experience for which there is nothing quite
comparable in Czech history and an experience that helps explain why to
outsiders so many Slovaks appear so eager to exaggerate slights or
grievances. We have to remember too that the Austro-Hungarian government
signed its own death warrant when together with Imperial Germany it
plunged Europe into the first of two World Wars and then followed
Imperial Germany's lead to making war on the United States. I believe
Allied recognition of Czechoslovakia to have been a desirable and
necessary step in hastening the Allies' defeat of the Central Powers and
putting an end to German dreams of world power until the seizure of
power by the Nazis in 1933.
One important question for historians is the extent to which the
legacy of Czechoslovakia will be primarily positive or primarily
negative. We shall, of course, have to wait to see to what extent the
Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic can continue to revive the
democratic traditions of Masaryk so thoroughly denigrated and devasted
by four decades of Communist dictatorship. I am cautiously optimistic
with regard to the Czechs but less so for the Slovaks, so long as the
HZDS and its allies maintain the direction they have given to domestic
policies since June 1992. I like to think that at the very least the
Czechoslovakia of 1918-38, 1942-46, and 1989-92 will be remembered for
having given democracy a chance to develop under the very inauspicious
conditions present in Central Europe during the twentieth century.
I think that we should also remember that the Nazis (along with
their Czech and Slovak collaborators) and the Czech and Slovak
Communists were the principal grave diggers of Czechoslovak democracy.
For more than forty years Czechoslovakia was synonomous with one of the
most vicious and corrupt of Communist tyrannies. That identification of
the Czechoslovak ideal with Communism, I think hastened the demise of
the Czechoslovak state. Were time and space to permit, I would be
pleased to indicate how and why I think the rise and fall of
Czechoslovakia is a much more complicated story than I have make it out
to be here. My intention is to develop these and other arguments further
in a forthcoming paper, hopefully to became an article.
I conclude by wishing my Czech and Slovak friends and colleagues
well as they work to manage and try to overcome the many serious
problems attendant upon the creation of two new Republics.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Date: Thur, 7 Jan 93
From: franya@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
Subject: Breaking up Czechoslovakia
Just a few comments on the break-up of Czechoslovakia. By my
opinion we have been witnessing a historical process and as such it
could not have been prevented, stopped, or controlled. Even the
communists eventually found out that they could not "boss the wind and
rain around". So, as the Canadians say, let us "make the most of it",
and "if you cannot beat them, join them". "How good or bad the
separation is" is not a static act determined now and for good, but it
is a dynamical process whose quality will depend on the quality of the
relationship between the two republics and the two peoples, Slovaks and
Czechs. Even though I feel nostalgic for Czechoslovakia, the fact is
that the Czech and Slovak peoples are distinct historical subjects
(though some people would argue to the contrary) and as such they have
gone their own ways and they are again. From the historical perspective
we just happened to travel the same route for almost 74 years (with some
exceptions like 1939- 45), which is a damned short period. I cannot
imagine any compelling reasons to maintain a common state in an
integrated Europe. I know we are not there yet, but eventually we will,
I dare to hope. So, what I think is all-important is to maintain
reasonable, mutually advantageous business, trade, and cultural ties.
Thus, let us stop to blame each other, let us stop to look for the
guilty parties, let us stop to look for the scapegoats, and let us
acknowledge that yes, we are different, and yes, we want to do things
differently, but so do hundreds of other nations. If we keep our cool
and do not blow things out of proportions, our biggest problem will be
to find a suitable one-word expression for Czechoslovakia less Slovakia.
What would be "Cesko" in English? "Czechland" as in "Iceland"? Or
"Czechia" to rhyme with "Slovakia"? The Canadian Post Office will
recognize the destination by the keyword Czech, I was told. So, there
you have a real problem.
Frantisek Franek, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, America, Earth, Solar
system, Milky way, Universe, ??
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This news may be published only with "CAROLINA" designation. The
subscription is free. Comments and remarks are appreciated. Send them
please to the address:
carolina@n.fsv.cuni.cs
To subscribe to CAROLINA you send an e-mail message to the address
LISTSERV@CSEARN.BITNET.
The text of the message is:
SUBSCRIBE CAR-ENG First name Last name
for the English version or
SUBSCRIBE CAR-CS First name Last name
for the Czech version. To delete your subscription from the list
you send the following message to LISTSERV:
SIGNOFF CAR-ENG or SIGNOFF CAR-CS